|Credit: Morguefile / kakisky|
|Used under "Fair Use" provisions for educational purposes:|
Atheistic "reasoning" using question-begging epithets
Welcome to the home of "The Question Evolution Project". There is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution. Evidence refuting evolution is suppressed by the scientific establishment, which is against the true spirit of scientific inquiry. Using an unregistered assault keyboard, articles and links to creation science resources are presented so people can obtain evidence that is not materialistic propaganda. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
|Credit: Morguefile / kakisky|
|Used under "Fair Use" provisions for educational purposes:|
Atheistic "reasoning" using question-begging epithets
|Credit: Pixabay / JavierRodrigues|
Time and again I am confronted with the view from young people that “Of course there are aliens out there. We can’t be the only ones.” This is a surprise to many of the older church folk in my acquaintance. However, CMI’s UFO authority, Gary Bates, indicates that in his experience belief in aliens can be found across all age groups—including churchgoers. Surveys estimate that more than 80% of Western peoples believe that ET is ‘out there somewhere’ which presumably encapsulates a lot of believers also.1 But many young folk in particular have been influenced by science fiction notions of aliens traversing the galaxy in their faster-than-light spaceships and advanced weaponry. And older folk are especially surprised to see that young people’s belief in extra-terrestrials often goes hand-in-hand with a morbid fear of what aliens will do to them.To read the rest of this very interesting article, click on "Hawking fear of aliens". You may also like a similar article that I wrote some time back, "A SETI-back for Evolution".
|Horse chestnut image credit: Freeimages / alesia17|
Biblical creationists are often asked about plant dispersal and propagation after a worldwide, devastating Flood. How many plants and seeds were brought aboard the Ark by Noah? Did some plants and seeds survive the Flood by means of riding atop vegetative mats, or by simply floating along? If so, how were these survivors able to propagate or re-seed after the Flood? Could some plants have survived as airborne seeds or spores? Or were they carried to the different continents around the world by human or animal vectors? The purpose of this paper is to address these and other questions regarding post-Flood plant survival and dispersal, and consider mechanisms by which this may have occurred.To read the rest of this admittedly long (but interesting) article, click on "How Did Plants Survive and Disperse after the Flood?"
|Credit: Image cropped from Pixabay / Couleur|
Recently, evolutionists discovered “microfossils up to almost 4.3 billion years old” in Canada.1 Their article states:It won't take up too much of your time to finish reading the article. Just click on "'Oldest Evidence' of Life?"
“It shows that some microbes have not changed significantly” since Earth’s early times, Papineau said. Earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago and the oceans appeared about 4.4 billion years ago. If the fossils are indeed 4.28 billion years old, that would suggest “an almost instantaneous emergence of life” after ocean formation, Dodd said.It is significant that these fossil microbes apparently didn’t change after four billion years—but evolution implies many, many changes over millions of years. If evolution involves substantial change, then why are these ancient microfossils so similar to modern microbes?
|Assembled from images at Clker clipart|
Evolutionists seem to enjoy rearranging branches on the Darwin tree, not to find the truth, but to fool the public into thinking they’re getting warmer.To finish reading (and get a couple of news items related to dinosaurs), click on "The Great Dinosaur Mix-up".
Alas, everything you were told about dinosaur evolution is wrong! That’s the impression from the headline hype. We’ll get to what’s actually happening below.
|Credit: Morguefile / pedrojperez|
The church of Christ upholds the truth; it doesn't tear the truth down; it doesn't destroy the truth. It doesn't mock the Scripture, nor does it substitute something else for it. It doesn't negotiate divine revelation. The true church has always clung to the truth, always. In the midst of every storm, in the midst of all persecution, in the midst of rejection--whether its enemies attack from the inside or attack from the outside--the true church has always clung to the truth. And thousands through its history have paid the price for the truth rather than compromise it or abandon it.For that matter, TEs and OECs often saddle up with atheists to ride for the Darwin brand. Suddenly, those compromising Christians who promote evolution are suddenly brilliant in the minds of atheists — and evolution is a foundation for the deadly religion of atheism . François de Larochefoucauld ("Frankie the Rock", as I call him) said, "We hardly find any persons of good sense save those who agree with us". For anti-creationists this can read, "Religious people show some smarts when they believe in evolution, yes siree!" Then they commence to ridiculing us for believing in the virgin birth, the parting of the Red Sea, changing water to wine, the bodily Resurrection of Jesus from the dead, and so on. See what happens? To atheists, compromisers are useful idiots! 
|Credit: Pixabay / sasint|
Some mammals have an appendix connected to their cecum—the first section of the large intestine—but others don't. How and when did that once-mysterious organ originate?To learn more, you can finish reading the article at "Solving Appendix Mysteries".
Midwestern University Anatomist Heather Smith led an extensive study of 533 mammal species, looking for clues to appendix evolution. Three of the team's scientific observations contradict evolutionary expectations.
This body part bears a wrong reputation as a useless leftover from supposed evolutionary ancestors that once used it. Now science has revealed plenty of valuable activities the appendix performs. It harbors microbes that help the gut recover after traumatic times. Lymphoid tissue also lives there, showing the appendix's integration with the immune system.
|Welwitchia credit: Wikimedia Commons / Muriel Gottrop (CC BY-SA 3.0)|
Another article proves the DAM Law, as evolutionists try to make the best of a bad situation.In addition to bad science and circular reasoning, the dubious research raises more questions. You can read about this and other botanical bafflers for evolution, by clicking on "Plants Fight Darwin".
The DAM Law states, “any article or paper on the evolution of flowering plants will be accompanied by the phrase, ‘Darwin’s Abominable Mystery’ (DAM).” Science Daily once again proves this law, not only in the body of an article, but in the headline, “Where do flowers come from? Shedding light on Darwin’s ‘abominable mystery’.”
|Credit: Pixabay / HeatherPaque|
I once designed a small knife which consisted of a slender rod with a tiny razor-sharp blade at the end. One of my students came across the knife and started using it to cut up cards.To finish reading, click on "Humans: Purposely Designed".
I explained to him that the knife was for something far more important—for carrying out life-saving operations on newly born boys who have a blocked bladder valve. If the student had looked closely at the intricate design of the knife, he would have known it was no ordinary knife.
Many today make the same mistake concerning the purpose of human life.
|Credits: Modified from Pixabay / CandaceHunter with NASA/ESA|
A recent paper by Niayesh Afshordi and João Magueijo asserts that they have discovered a testable cosmology wherein during a “critical” cosmological phase of the early universe the maximal speed of propagation of matter (and hence light) was enormously much faster than the current speed of light (c) and faster than the speed of gravity, which in Einstein’s theory is the canonical speed c.To finish reading, click on "Does the new much-faster-speed-of-light theory fix the big bang’s problems?"
They revisit what has become to be known as varying speed of light (VSL) models, in contrast to the now popular cosmic inflation models. They believe light traveled much faster just after the big bang than it does now and have developed a mathematical model of a big bang universe only a miniscule fraction of a second after the alleged hot beginning of the universe.
|It may be a surprise to learn that Horsfeld's bronze cuckoo can be a real jerk|
Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Aviceda (CC BY-SA 3.0)
In this fallen world, even bird households have troubles. One family problem encountered by many bird parents is the nest-security issue of brood parasites, a sneaky form of fowl “home invasion.”To finish reading, click on "Pushy Parasites and Parental Passwords".
Brood parasitism does not involve parasitic worms or bugs. Rather, it features a different kind of parasite—a freeloading bird family that imposes its baby upon a “host” family. The host family is thereafter burdened with the costs of nurturing the uninvited freeloader. Worse, the invasive guest often competes aggressively with legitimate nestlings for food and shelter.
|Screenshot from Nye/Ham The Second Debate, courtesy of Answers in Genesis|
|Credit: Modified from Freeimages / Kenn Kiser|
|Used under Fair Use for educational purposes|
An article recently appeared on Scientific American titled “How To Convince Someone When Facts Fail: Why Worldview Threats Undermine Evidence.” The author, Michael Shermer, writes,To finish reading why Mike is inconsistent and doesn't understand worldviews, click on "Why Aren’t People Convinced by Facts?"
Have you ever noticed that when you present people with facts that are contrary to their deepest held beliefs they always change their minds? Me neither. In fact, people seem to double down on their beliefs in the teeth of overwhelming evidence against them. The reason is related to the worldview perceived to be under threat by the conflicting data.He provides several examples of what he means by this, including,
Creationists, for example, dispute the evidence for evolution in fossils and DNA because they are concerned about secular forces encroaching on religious faith.He says “proponents' deepest held worldviews were perceived to be threatened by skeptics, making facts the enemy to be slayed.” But do creationists really view facts as the “enemy to be slayed”? Well, let’s turn this thinking around on him. What about those who hold to evolutionary ideas? Do evolutionists listen to facts when they are presented by creationists? Or do they “double down on their beliefs” and “dispute the evidence?” Of course they dispute the evidence because it goes against their deeply held worldview.
|Credit: US National Park Service|
Until early 2015, the ‘earliest’ date reported for a fossil snake was less than 100 Ma old. In January, a team led by University of Alberta (Canada) paleontologist Professor Michael Caldwell described fossils of four new species, in Nature Communications, which they claimed extended the snake fossil record backwards by about 70 Ma to the Middle Jurassic.
‘Earliest’ snake fossils
The new species reported were:
- Parviraptor estesi (from Dorset, England)—145–140 Ma
- Diablophis gilmorei (from Colorado, USA)—155 Ma
- Portugalophis lignites (from Guimarota, Portugal)—157–152 Ma
- Eophis underwoodi (from Oxfordshire, England)—167 Ma.
The skull anatomy of all four of these ‘ancient’ snakes, they say, is similar to that of both modern snakes and other fossil snakes. Of course, this is unexpected. However, the skull structure of previously reported fossil snakes, Pachyrhachis problematicus and Haasiophis terrasanctus, also surprised evolutionary researchers, resembling that of modern boas and pythons (deemed ‘advanced’).To read the rest, click on "Standard snake evolution story stymied by spate of fossil discoveries".
|Made at Atom Smasher|
Studies show that having a sense of purpose enhances mental and physical health. The problem for materialists is how to conjure it up out of matter in motion.To read the rest of this one, click on "Can Materialism Provide a Sense of Purpose?" Be sure y'all come back for the other item.
New Scientist, the staunchly atheist rag in the UK, is no friend of creation, conservatism, or the Bible. Once in awhile, though, they do have to face reality. Reporter Teal Burrell recently contributed a piece to New Scientist about “A meaning to life: How a sense of purpose can keep you healthy.” Can she get from atoms to purpose?
Name a vice, and Darwinians will be there to rationalize it on evolutionary grounds. They claim proud ownership of the Seven Deadly Sins.I hope you'll read the rest of the article. Just click on "Evolutionary Materialism Promotes Deadly Sins".
Timothy D. Clark preached a fiery sermon to the readers of Nature last week, warning about the alarming rise of dishonesty among scientists. “Too many researchers make up or massage their data,” he says. It’s not a small problem, either. You can almost hear the pounding on the pulpit:
|Basement Cat looking intent|
Many arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness of God’s existence have been advanced over past millennia. On this issue, the biblical record maintains that clear evidence of God’s reality resides in the natural realm all around us. This evidence is so plain, the record claims, that no human being can fail to have awareness of God’s existence (Rom 1:20). This paper calls attention to a category of reality that provides especially powerful support for God’s existence. Our focus is upon the phenomenon of language. We begin from our own subjective experience of this phenomenon and then extend our considerations to the realm of the material world around us. Because language is so integral to our own mental processes and so intuitive in the way we relate to other human beings, most of us never pause to analyze just what is occurring when we think, write, speak, or process what we read or hear others say. Therefore, a crucial first step in this discussion is to establish clearly what the term language entails.To finish reading this extremely interesting article, click on "A Linguistic Argument for God’s Existence".